India Launches Nationwide "Mediation For Nation" Campaign to To Settle Pending Cases Across Nation

 India is set to initiate an ambitious 90-day nationwide mediation initiative aimed at resolving the country's mounting case backlogs through alternative dispute resolution methods.

Campaign Overview

The "Mediation For the Nation" campaign will commence on July 1, 2025, and run through September 30, 2025, marking a comprehensive effort to tackle pending litigation across the country. This pan-India initiative has been conceptualized by Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and Justice Surya Kant, representing a top-level judicial commitment to promoting mediation as a viable alternative to traditional court proceedings.

Print Page

Supreme Court Rejects Refund Claim For Private Out-of-Court Settlement : 'Court Fee Refund Only If Case Settled Through ADR Mechanisms'

The refund of court fees is permissible only if the

matter is referred to Arbitration, Conciliation, judicial

settlement, including through Lok Adalat or mediation for

settlement and the case is decided in terms of such a

settlement and not otherwise. {Para 6}

7. In the case at hand, the settlement in terms of which

the second appeal was decided by the High Court is not on

reference to any of the above authorities/fora rather it was

an amicable settlement out of the court.

8. Accordingly, we are of the opinion that the petitioner

is not entitled to refund of the court fees and the High

Court has not committed any error or illegality in refusing

such a prayer.

 S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

PETITION(S) FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (C) NO(S). 723/2023

JAGE RAM Vs VED KAUR & ORS.

Date : 28-01-2025 This petition was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ MITHAL

 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH

Print Page

Mediation Act, 2023: A New Era for Alternative Dispute Resolution in India

 The Mediation Act, 2023 is a significant legislative framework in India designed to promote and regulate mediation as an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanism. Here are the key features and implications of the Act:

 Key Features of the Mediation Act, 2023

1. Promotion of Mediation

The Act aims to enhance the use of mediation, particularly institutional mediation, to resolve disputes efficiently. It encourages parties to explore mediation before initiating litigation, thereby reducing court congestion.

Print Page

Beyond the Courtroom: The Role of ADR in Indian Legal Framework

 Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in India serves as a crucial mechanism for resolving disputes outside the traditional court system, offering various methods such as arbitration, mediation, conciliation, and Lok Adalat. This approach is particularly significant given the backlog of cases in Indian courts, which has prompted both the judiciary and the government to promote ADR as a means to ensure quicker and more cost-effective justice.

 Legal Framework Governing ADR

Civil Procedure Code, 1908

The foundation for ADR in India is laid out in Section 89 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), 1908. This section empowers courts to refer disputes to alternative methods of resolution when it appears that there are elements of a settlement acceptable to the parties involved. The methods recognized under this provision include:

Print Page

Lokadalat: An Effective Alternative Dispute Resolution Remedy in Indian Law

 The concept of Lokadalat, or "People's Court," is a significant component of the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) system in India. It serves as an informal mechanism for resolving disputes quickly and affordably, embodying the principles of Gandhian justice. This article explores the structure, functioning, and effectiveness of Lokadalats as an alternative remedy for dispute resolution under Indian law.

Historical Background and Legal Framework

Lokadalats have their roots in traditional village councils, known as Gram Panchayats, which historically resolved conflicts through informal methods. The modern Lokadalat system was formally introduced in 1982 in Gujarat, evolving into a statutory framework with the enactment of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. This Act established Lokadalats as a permanent feature of the Indian legal system, granting them legal authority to resolve disputes amicably.

Print Page

Whether court can return plaint on ground of availability of alternative dispute redressal mechanism?

The learned Judge wrongly read the provisions of Order 7 Rule 10
of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), which is reproduced as under:
“Order 7 Rule 10- Return of plaint- (1) Subject to the provisions of
rule 10A, the plaint shall at any stage of the suit be returned to be
presented to the court in which the suit should have been instituted.
Explanation: For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that a
court of appeal or revision may direct, after setting aside the decree
passed in a suit, the return of the plaint, under this sub-rule.
(2)
Procedure on returning —On returning a plaint, the Judge
shall endorse thereon the date of its presentation and return, the
name of the party presenting it, and a brief statement of the reasons
for returning it.

The “Court” as mentioned is the basic requirement. The words

“Court” and “jurisdiction” are not specifically defined in CPC. However, the
concepts of “Court” and “jurisdiction” are read and referred in most of the part
of the CPC. It is well settled also. The proper forum as read and referred and
included within the term of Court by the learned Judge, in view of plain reading
of above, itself is wrong. The effect of such clauses where parties agree to settle

and/or decide their disputes, arising out of the terms and conditions of the
contract through a private forum is always an alternative mode/mechanism. Such
dispute redressal system other than the Court, has various facets. The same are
elaborated in Section 89 of CPC. The concept therefore itself is very clear that
the proceedings in the Court, are different that the proceedings initiated and/or
referred before the dispute resolution mechanism and or the forum like
arbitration, mediation, conciliation and lokadalat. The clause with such
mechanism as adopted and in spite of notice, the disputes could not be settled,
and there was a delay, and the contractor wanted an interim order and injunction
from the Court, the alleged forum, as recorded in the clause, in no way
competent to deal with the situation and/or grant such declarative/interim/reliefs.
The option so agreed, in no way debars the parties to initiate and/or to file a civil
suit in the competent court for the reliefs including damages for the work done
by them. There is nothing even pointed out and/or referred in the terms and
conditions and/or in the order that such suit and/or initiation of such proceedings

is barred. The forum so provided, cannot be compared with the power of civil
court jurisdiction to decide and/or grant relief as prayed in such suits. The
“forum” is not the “Court” as contemplated under CPC. The judgment so cited,
in no way dealt with the aspect in question specifically to return the plaint for
presentation before the alleged proper forum as contemplated under Order 7 Rule
10 of CPC. The jurisdiction of Court is not restricted by such clauses. The

jurisdiction of civil court is not restricted by such clauses.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 449 OF 2013

Shri Pravin Pandurang Patil Vs. Executive Engineer,
Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana,
Zilla Parishad Premises, Sangli.

Print Page

Whether court can grant relief to party even if their dispute is pending before alternative forum like ADR, mediation and lokadalat?

The effect of such clauses where parties agree to settle

and/or decide their disputes, arising out of the terms and conditions of the
contract through a private forum is always an alternative mode/mechanism. Such
dispute redressal system other than the Court, has various facets. The same are
elaborated in Section 89 of CPC. The concept therefore itself is very clear that
the proceedings in the Court, are different that the proceedings initiated and/or
referred before the dispute resolution mechanism and or the forum like
arbitration, mediation, conciliation and lokadalat. The clause with such
mechanism as adopted and in spite of notice, the disputes could not be settled,
and there was a delay, and the contractor wanted an interim order and injunction
from the Court, the alleged forum, as recorded in the clause, in no way
competent to deal with the situation and/or grant such declarative/interim/reliefs.
The option so agreed, in no way debars the parties to initiate and/or to file a civil
suit in the competent court for the reliefs including damages for the work done
by them. There is nothing even pointed out and/or referred in the terms and
conditions and/or in the order that such suit and/or initiation of such proceedings

is barred. The forum so provided, cannot be compared with the power of civil
court jurisdiction to decide and/or grant relief as prayed in such suits. The
“forum” is not the “Court” as contemplated under CPC. The judgment so cited,
in no way dealt with the aspect in question specifically to return the plaint for
presentation before the alleged proper forum as contemplated under Order 7 Rule
10 of CPC. The jurisdiction of Court is not restricted by such clauses. 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 449 OF 2013

Shri Pravin Pandurang Patil Vs. Executive Engineer,
Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana,
Zilla Parishad Premises, Sangli.


CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.
DATE : 19 NOVEMBER, 2013.
Citation; 2014 (1) MH L J 373 Bombay,2014(2) ALLMR 634

Print Page